Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remah Naji

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Consensus is clear that the article does not meet our notability guidelines for politicians. Many keep arguments were not based on policy and were discounted. There were some suggestions to draftify the article, but there was not clear consensus for this. Malinaccier (talk) 23:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remah Naji (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Apparently a political candidate at an upcoming federal election in Australia. I can't see that there is significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources and doesn't meet WP:NPOL. TarnishedPathtalk 12:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It was clearly written for self-promotion. She is not yet a public figure and not a politician. All of the attached references also seem to be somewhat self-reported and most of the sources seem insufficient. She is not an academic despite some references to her being an 'educator' and WP:NPOL states "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline." 2001:8003:6DE4:E800:2414:EC58:4584:986F (talk) 00:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: What do you mean "apparently"? They're in the Sydney Morning Herald, The Guardian, Women's Agenda, and on Serious Danger within a week of their announcement. Stop trying to use process to remove women's polticial history. User:Monjento|Monjento 23:21, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or draftify: This and this are fairly in-depth but there isn't much outside of that. Political candidates are always going to have some coverage so this isn't enough to overcome NPOL and meet WP:NBASIC. I would support a draftification that can be reverted if she wins the election. C F A 💬 00:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's your subjective opinion? Why are you targetting removing the history of a women of colour, who is a refugee, from a minority party contesting a seat that is marginal? Monjento (talk) 00:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Key word there is "marginal", meaning it's not that important. Woman of color isn't notable alone; if she wins the election, she would be notable. Paying a fee to register as a candidate doesn't get you an article here. Oaktree b (talk) 00:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No that's not what marginal means in this context. In Australian politics, when a seat is marginal it means that it's the one to watch because of its signficance and likelihood to change. Monjento (talk) 01:33, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So she's notable for being a candidate of colour? That doesn't get you an article either, people of all colours and creeds run in elections, everywhere. Oaktree b (talk) 12:05, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't see her meeting WP:NPOL as a political candidate. It is irrelevant that she is a woman of colour, refugee or from a minority party. She needs to meet WP:BIO which she doesn't. LibStar (talk) 00:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, this is another comment that is subjective of whether the WP:BIO or WP:NPOL. Neither say how many articles are required.
    It is relevant to consider those demographics in the context of the Wikipedia projects to ensure that women's history isn't erased. This is signficant in Australia, which I note that you're not from. Monjento (talk) 01:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How do you know that I am in or not in Australia? LibStar (talk) 05:20, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Running for office isn't notable, being from this country or that country doesn't affect notability here. Career is non-notable outside of the political run. The sources used are articles about getting to know the candidate, rather routine. She's only running in a place with 100,000 folks, which is rather tiny on a national scale. Could be notable if and when elected, just TOOSOON at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 00:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is Australia. All of our electorates are this size. This comment is devoid from the reality of the Australian poltical landscape. Monjento (talk) 01:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    100k is tiny in a country with millions, you're about the same as Canada for pete's sake Oaktree b (talk) 04:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is correct as a sensible approximation: "This is Australia. All of our electorates are this size." References: 2022 federal election enrolment statistics and The voting population of each Australian electoral division showing most are very roughly around 110,00 - 120,00, and about 30% are smaller than 100,000. It's irrelevant that Australia and Canada have about the same population and size because they are different countries and have differences in their electoral systems. Lady alys (talk) 03:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    She isn't even scheduled to run in an election, she's only a declared future candidate. She paid a fee and got her name added on a list. The election hasn't been called and we don't know when it will, there is no by-election happening. She's barely even a candidate at this point; IF an election gets called AND she's still interested, she'll be on the ballot. Please read CRYSTALBALL, as that helps understand why she's not yet notable (and may or may not ever be at this point). This person may be notable at some point in the future, if an election happens... Too many if's and but's to keep the article at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 20:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Naji's significance lies in her representation of three issues of great significance in Australia especially as there will be a federal election by May 2025. Last weekend's election in the Northern Territory resulted in a very large swing against the party of the current federal government, and towards the Greens. The high level of national discontent with the Labor government over environmental policy, women's issues, and the current situation in Gaza, mmeans that Naji is in a position of overlap. Her electorate of Moreton is one of the most winnable seats for the Greens in the 2025 federal election. Australia is a middle power, and our political landscape will have an impact on our regional and international policies. Naji is an important political figure to watch. Paperbarkk (talk) 02:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC) Paperbarkk (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
    That's very much what TOOSOON covers, she isn't notable now, but might be in the future. Oaktree b (talk) 12:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:NPOL. The article can be recreated if she is elected. Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails WP:NPOL pretty clearly. The sources we have are rather routine in their coverage for the most part, focus on just stating who the candidate is (WP:ROUTINE coverage), or lack the depth to be of significance towards meeting notability guidelines. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as this fails WP:NPOL. If candidate wins election, then page should be created. Ktkvtsh (talk) 02:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify If she wins office, she'll meet NPOL and the draft can be edited and submitted via AfC or moved to mainspace. If she doesn't, the draft will probably languish and eventually be deleted. I'm not seeing a compelling reason to delete; the article has some NPOV issues but it's pretty easily salvageable. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Off-topic discussion about socking that can be discussed in the thread at ANI. Also a reminder to keep things civil. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, clear NPOL failure. The suggestion made above that my colleagues are "trying to use process to remove women's polticial history" is ridiculous and offensive, and should be struck or explicitly withdrawn. Daniel (talk) 07:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify. Has potential as a major-party candidate in a winnable seat, but not ready for mainspace until notability is more firmly established (i.e. election victory or exceptional coverage of her campaign). Existing sources are more or less routine election coverage or represent coverage of broader pro-Palestine activism rather than being "about" Naji herself. I T B F 💬 08:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's draftified the editor would likely move it straight back to mainspace, like they did after it was draftified by an admin and then rejected by an AFC reviewer. See my comment below for details. TarnishedPathtalk 09:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Then it would get speedied. No harm, no foul. voorts (talk/contributions) 18:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment:
    • On 16/08/2024 with the edit at Special:Diff/1240636409 Deb moved Remah Naji to draft with edit summary "Deb moved page Remah Naji to Draft:Remah Naji without leaving a redirect: Move to draftspace (WP:DRAFTIFY): nowhere near ready for article space".
    • Deb notified Monjento on their talk at Special:Diff/1240636897.
    • On 17/08/2024 Monjento submitted the article to AFC with edit Special:Diff/1240645572.
    • On 17/08/2024 the article was rejected by an AFC reviewer at Special:Diff/1240651098 with them leaving edit summary "*Declining submission: bio - Submission is about a person not yet shown to meet notability guidelines (AFCH)".
    • On 17/08/2024 Monjento, despite the article being rejected by AFC, moved it to mainspace at Special:Diff/1240708788.
    • The next edit at Special:Diff/1240708996 Monjento removed the AFC templates, including a comment left by the AFC reviewer, and left a personal attack in their edit summary writing "Removed the editorialised and uneducated opinion of someone that does not live in Australia".TarnishedPathtalk 09:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This [1] is a brief article about the individual, which seems to largely mirror the prose used here for some reason. It doesn't really show notability outside of the political run, which is the issue. Oaktree b (talk) 12:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: There is no by-election scheduled in Division of Moreton anytime soon, and an election hasn't been called in Australia and doesn't seem to be scheduled until 2025. According to WP:POLOUTCOMES, candidates for political office are rarely, if ever, notable enough to meet wikipedia notability guidelines. If Naji is elected to Parliament, then she would be notable. Bkissin (talk) 16:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So there's not even an election happening soon? Why are we debating this then, "someone who has an intention to run at some future point in the next 18 mths in a yet uncalled election", isn't notable. Her career is rather routine otherwise and would not pass GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 19:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The election must be called in the next 6 months and completed by May 2025. It could be over as soon as December, That’s a lot less than 18 months. It’s confusing, but see Next Australian federal election#Election date for details. twilsonb (talk) 01:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. People do not get articles just for being named as candidates in future elections — the notability test at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not running for one, and as yet unelected candidates get articles only if they can demonstrate that either (a) they were already notable enough for an article for some other reason independently of being named as a candidate, or (b) they can demonstrate a credible reason why their candidacy should be seen as a special case of significantly greater notability than everybody else's candidacies. But neither of those are on offer here.
    Also, unelected candidates are not exempted from NPOL just because they can show some evidence of campaign coverage — every candidate in every election everywhere can always show some evidence of campaign coverage, so if campaign coverage were all it took to exempt a candidate from NPOL then every candidate would always get that exemption and NPOL itself would be meaningless and unenforceable. So a candidate only becomes notable if she passes one of the two tests I noted above. And a candidate is also not exempted from NPOL just because she's female: as important as "women's political history" is, it does not require us to maintain biographical articles about every woman who ever ran as a candidate in an election she didn't win. Bearcat (talk) 15:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well said, thank you. Oaktree b (talk) 01:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or Draftify: Meets WP:GNG, as of 3 September the article has roughly 10 reliable sources with significant coverage, including multiple national newspapers. Half of those sources talk about things other that her candidacy, so she meets the general notability guidelines. Also happy to see it draftified, so it can gather more edits with reliable sources. twilsonb (talk) 01:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.